[Rd] question

[Wacek Kusnierczyk]

Gabor Grothendieck wrote:
>
>> as gabor says in another post, you probably should first show why having
>> multiple value returns would be useful in r.  however, i don't think
>> there are good counterarguments anyway, and putting on you the burden of
>> proving a relatively obvious (or not so?) thing is a weak escape.
>>
>> to call for a reference, sec. 9.2.3, p. 450+ in [1] provides some
>> discussion and examples.
>>
>>     
>
> The fact that other languages is an argument for further consideration
> but not a definitive argument for it.
>   

of course!

> I have had this feature for years via my workaround yet I never
> use it which seems a good argument against it.
>   

the fact that another programmer is an argument for further
consideration but not a definitive argument against it.

vQ